Posted on 10/11/2007 2:00:29 PM PDT by Spiff
• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List •
Your assessment is sound. This will be a real test of evangelicals to see if they can put aside their many perceived and few actual theological differences with Mormons and realize that what is more important is supporting someone with the same values. A person of the Jewish faith is not Christian, doesn't agree theologically, but may also share the same values. I would hope that evangelicals would also vote for someone of the Jewish faith for the same reason.
I don't think anyone should hesitate to pull the lever for someone who shares their same values despite some theological differences. When theological differences come into play is when those theological differences lead to a wide separation of values. When a candidate's values are nearly the same as a voter, then the theological differences aren't nearly as relevant - if at all.
I’ve heard of the DeMoss agency. They are publicist to some of the largest Christian organizations in the country. Found this list of their clients, interesting enough, Focus on the Family is one of them.
http://www.demossgroup.com/clients.htm
I have a hard time believing that Romney will garner an overwhelming majority of the evangelical support, and I say that as a Romney supporter.
You’d think that Thompson would have had a lot of that locked up. He’s a son of the south. Sort of talks like it. But his confessions about not supporting the Federal Marriage Amendment, not believing in criminalizing abortion, and not finding church important enough to him to attend on a regular basis will cut into his votes.
It would make sense for Romney to be the candidate evangelicals rally behind. He’s the one espousing their views. Will they? Like you said, I’m not sure.
If Huckabee had a different last name, a lot more money, or hadn’t been such an open borders/tax raisin’ kind of guy, we might have a different story. If Thompson hadn’t espoused the views he does, we might have a different story. As for now, I think Romney could rally some late support. As is even evidenced on here, his Mormonism will hurt him. As will the fact that he changed position on abortion, regardless of his veto record in Mass.
But I think he’s in good position to start to pull more supporters into his camp, especially as they start heeding the message more closely.
There are many very real, deadly-serious theological differences between evangelical Christianity and Mormonism, such that many (including me) cannot accept Mormonism as being within Christianity at all.
But you are right about the rest. And at this point I consider myself a Romney supporter, although I'm also open to Fred Thompson and (if he would just drop the nanny-state crap) Mike Huckabee at this point.
Its interesting how McCain is a no-go with evangelicals. I would have thought they would hold him in higher esteem than the rest of the conservative base.
Finally, some common sense exercised in an attempt to derail Rudy's lead in the polls and rally evangelical voters behind the one man most capable of denying Rudy the nomination.
Sounds like he has the same idea that Ann Coulter recently espoused:
The writer, Mark DeMoss, a publicity agent whose clients include the Rev. Franklin Graham, wrote the five-page letter, urging the recipients to “galvanize support around Mitt Romney, so Mr. Giuliani isn’t the unintended beneficiary of our divided support among several candidates.”
If the two choices were only Mitt and Rudy, I’d definitely choose Mitt.
I am glad Romney says he is pro-life now. But it smells to high heaven of political expediency.
Just like, you know all his other conversions.
Guns. Gay rights. Illegal immigration. yadda yadda.
Excellent, thanks.
McCain has stabbed Christians in the back one time too many, but that is only one reason that we don’t like him.
The stakes are high. Do conservative Christians ignore their core beliefs and vote into office a man whose religion claims to be THE restored Christianity and therefore by inference the Christianity of the conservative Christians not in that church are not 'real Christians'? The current Romney strategy is to reverse this question and make it appear that Mormonism is being attacked as not Christian, when of course the reverse is the reality as clearly seen in the founding principle claims of Mormonism. I don't think dissonance is going to work as a strategy to get this man elected Presidnet. But the Romney camp seems to think it will, when 'hold your nose' push comes to 'fall in line regardless' shove.
Listen, if the "theological differences" were really "few," Joseph Smith would have tried to be a reformer, not a restorationist. Joseph wouldn't have unloaded his try of a nuclear spiritual bomb by labeling "all" Christian creeds as "an abomination before God" and he wouldn't have labeled them as "all" corrupt.
But nice try. I mean the Reorganized Church of LDS doesn't even try to reduce their differences with the Mormon church as "few," and here both are Book of Mormon, restorationist-believing entities.
As for some of those "few" differences: Christians don't baptize dead folks; they're not polytheists; they don't believe they can become gods; their Heavenly Father wasn't a created being; they don't attempt to earn salvation or exaltation; they don't believe their only living prophet & spiritual interpreter lives in the Salt Lake City area; and I could go on and on about those "few" differences.
You also keep neglecting how it is that Mitt is supposed to inspire us when his faith keeps telling us: : "You are an apostate from Christ. Every creed of yours is an abomination before God. Your leaders are corrupt. So I can count on your vote, then?"
I mean I could head off down the street to a local major retailer and pull off a book right there published from Utah that outlines the so-called 100% apostasy of the Christian church. (100% = no true survivors outside the LDS church)
Why would we want a White House-hyped faith elevated by the Salt Lake City PR machine that specializes in diminishing the historic Christian faith and everyone who identifies with that?
No way, NO WAY would I ever vote for Romney. Let him run for "Prophet." President, no way.
I find it interesting that you don't even need to compare Mitt's old stances on all kinds of issues with his new stances to see how "convenient" his changes are. I mean just go back to 1994 with some of the YouTube clips of his debate against Ted Kennedy.
He says he will "sustain and support that [Roe-based] law" and that he would "sustain and support" a woman's choice [to abortion]. What few folks understand is that the word "sustained" to a Mormon is a sacred word.
LDS have that word several times in Doctrines & Covenants (LDS "Scripture"). "Sustained" is the word used by LDS grassroots members toward their dead "prophets," their living "prophets," and their general authorities. By "sustaining" these people, the entire belief system is committed to what they have revealed.
For Mitt to say he would "sustain" Roe and then not "sustain" Roe would be like a Mormon saying he would "sustain" his living prophet and then back out.
Likewise, Mitt covers all bases with his 1994 statement on the Boy Scouts, first saying the Boy Scouts should do what they want to do; and then saying in his next breath anybody of any "sexual orientation" "should be allowed to participate" in the Scouts.
If he is viewed as the only hope of defeating Giuliani, yes.
At least one can rationalize that Romney is a Mormon and actually really is a social conservative.
I'd trust Romney to keep his word far more than Giuliani.
You should mention the fact that Mark DeMoss is a paid consultant of the Romney campaign.
How many evangelical and pro-life leaders have to vet Mitt Romney and express their support before you realize that you're wrong when you accuse Romney of a false conversion? They've got their credibility to lose and the missions of their organization can be negatively effected if they're wrong. They did the homework and they came up Romney supporters. It's not some conspiracy to fool you into voting for Romney. These are bona fide conservative, pro-life, and evangelical leaders and such that are putting their support behind Romney because that, more than any other top tier candidate, he shares their conservative, pro-life, and pro-family values.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.